Slog
News & ArtsThursday, March 12, 2009
Media Porn Is Bad
Posted by Dan Savage on Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 10:37 AM
The New York Times' new conservative opinion columnist—Ross Douthat—believes that porn is a form of adultery and that I'm not helping. It's war!
1
Which is older, the "is porn good or bad?" argument or the "which came first, chicken or egg?" argument.
And what's even the point of telling anyone that porn is bad? The demand for porn obviously shows it's not a convincing argument.
And what's even the point of telling anyone that porn is bad? The demand for porn obviously shows it's not a convincing argument.
2
Yeah, big surprise that Dworkin and McKinnon would wind up as figureheads for the reactionary right. After all, one of the most compelling critiques of that strain of feminism has been that it defines itself only in opposition to all things patriarchal, and without that enemy it has nothing to say.
So, little surprise that it winds up being used in the name of the same kinds of authoritarian rule-brokering as Dobson's work.
So, little surprise that it winds up being used in the name of the same kinds of authoritarian rule-brokering as Dobson's work.
3
Anyone else bothered by the repeated use of the word "use"?
I do not "use" porn, I "view" porn. Also as a "homosexual" I frequently view porn with my husband. If this is infidelity, then it is a three-way. Why are the straights so hung up about sex?
I do not "use" porn, I "view" porn. Also as a "homosexual" I frequently view porn with my husband. If this is infidelity, then it is a three-way. Why are the straights so hung up about sex?
4
I note that nowhere in the article does ol' Ross Asshat say that he's never looked at porn. Because, you know, that would be hypocritical.
5
The article emphasizes in two places that hard core porn is the problem. Hard core. Cover up a little, tease a bit, you know, class it up the way they do in soft core and then we're not talking adultery any more. Got it?
Also, Ross Douthat needs to stop rambling on for nine pages in The Atlantic before bitching about Philip Weiss’s "rambling essay for New York magazine."
Also, Ross Douthat needs to stop rambling on for nine pages in The Atlantic before bitching about Philip Weiss’s "rambling essay for New York magazine."
6
I wonder if this dufus thinks that masturbation without porn is also adultry? He probably thinks his wife and children have to answer to him about that.
8
So, even if it is adultery, why should I care, exactly? So two people got up in a church full of their friends and family and promised to give the person standing next to them exclusive access to their genitalia, and now they're breaking that promise by looking at pictures while touching their own genitalia and -- what the fuck do I care? There are real problems in the world, and this crap is way, way down on the list.
9
Okay, so I think his viewpoint is totally stupid and incorrect but let me play devil's advocate for his continued existence in the public spotlight.
Like it or not, agree or not, many folks in the world treat looking at porn while you're in a relationship as, if not a deal-breaker, a definite no-no. But nobody asks why or even talks about it. Straight men hide it from their wives and gay men hide it from each other. * Sure, if you were to say to any of them who ban it from their homes -- either vocally or by assumption -- that porn = adultery, they'd laugh and say "of course not." But by bringing up the point and discussing it intelligently in the light of day rather than in the shadows, it forces couples to examine the question and question their assumptions. And forcing somebody to explain why beating off to porn is equivalent to them screwing somebody else either shows the weakness of the argument or the weakness of the relationship (or at least the character of the person involved.) So it's win-win.
* All I know about lesbian porn is that my lesbian friends never think there's any good enough for them to waste their time on.
Like it or not, agree or not, many folks in the world treat looking at porn while you're in a relationship as, if not a deal-breaker, a definite no-no. But nobody asks why or even talks about it. Straight men hide it from their wives and gay men hide it from each other. * Sure, if you were to say to any of them who ban it from their homes -- either vocally or by assumption -- that porn = adultery, they'd laugh and say "of course not." But by bringing up the point and discussing it intelligently in the light of day rather than in the shadows, it forces couples to examine the question and question their assumptions. And forcing somebody to explain why beating off to porn is equivalent to them screwing somebody else either shows the weakness of the argument or the weakness of the relationship (or at least the character of the person involved.) So it's win-win.
* All I know about lesbian porn is that my lesbian friends never think there's any good enough for them to waste their time on.
10
Also, I'm not sure why you're bringing this up. Do you think making one stupid argument disqualifies you from having a newspaper column? Dan, I really don't think you want to go there.
12
to be fair, he avoids hyperbole and weighs the arguments. i agree with 9. it's a discussion worth having, even if i disagree with his conclusion. hell, some stranger staffers have come to more wack conclusions AND made less sense while coming to them.
13
@9
' Straight men hide it from their wives and gay men hide it from each other.'
is this true ?. the gay part i mean. do gay men hide porn from their partners ? I never heard that one until now.
' Straight men hide it from their wives and gay men hide it from each other.'
is this true ?. the gay part i mean. do gay men hide porn from their partners ? I never heard that one until now.
14
What is it with Republicans' need to wage war on things that can't be beaten?
Drugs, Terror, Porn, God....the list just goes on and on.
It is even more disturbing given that the US has such a long list of things we can fight and win.
Drugs, Terror, Porn, God....the list just goes on and on.
It is even more disturbing given that the US has such a long list of things we can fight and win.
16
Please see also: http://www.sadlyno.com/archives/18525.ht…
From Sadly, No!, a site that really ought to be on the Slogroll.
From Sadly, No!, a site that really ought to be on the Slogroll.
17
This is certainly a waste of trees and ink. So he admits that most people would consider it absurd that lascivously perusing the Sports Illustrated swimsuit issue does not constitute adultery but then completely fails to demonstrate what the difference is between that soft porn and 'hard-core' pornography. For that matter what exactly is the difference between looking at porn and untechnologically assisted sexual fantasies? The guardians of the sanctity of marriage really have their work cut out for them if they want to do away with those.
18
Urgutha@1: Your question, in the context of this comment thread, reminds me of an old cartoon, wish I could find a link. It's a drawing of a chicken and an egg, sitting up side-by-side in bed, each with a cigarette, and the chicken is speaking. Caption: "You came first. You _always_ come first."
19
When I was in college, long ago, I had a roommate who was a republican. He had the largest porn collection I'd ever seen one person decide to collect.
20
Couldn't they have just taken one of the Washington Post's "conservative" columnists and let someone with a brain occupy that spot at WaPo, instead of getting another failure for the NY Times?
21
There must be a lot of adulterers in Utah!
People need to lighten up about sex.
I once worked for a small porn company. (No, I wasn't in them. I was the editor.)
People need to lighten up about sex.
I once worked for a small porn company. (No, I wasn't in them. I was the editor.)
22
@14: As long as the fundies don't wage war on the wiener.
Because it can be beaten.
And is.
Frequently.
Because it can be beaten.
And is.
Frequently.
27
I'd love to browse Ross Douthat's browser's cache. I'm sure it was for "research". Even the gay stuff.
28
Is it typical for men to hide their porn consumption from their wives?
That hasn't been my experience...
That hasn't been my experience...
29
@13&28 I think when one member of a couple looks down on something and refuses to talk rationally about it, then the other member either stops doing it or hides doing it. People don't typically stop looking at porn - they hide it. I think this could stand true for gay or het.
30
It really, really bothers me that every discussion of porn I ever see or read assumes that men watch porn, and women are the victims of porn.
I am a straight woman. I like porn. I have straight female friends who like porn. Sometimes, we watch porn together. One friend in particular is a porn connoisseur who has an awesome STASH of porn on DVD, in addition to watching it online.
Sometimes we watch it for amusement. Sometimes we watch it to get off. Several of my porn-watching female friends are married and/or are in serious relationships. Sometimes, the guys don't watch porn as much as THEY do!
The point is, women aren't the "long-suffering victims" of porn that as the press seems to want you to believe. And if men enjoy it, and women enjoy it.....
....what was the problem again?
I am a straight woman. I like porn. I have straight female friends who like porn. Sometimes, we watch porn together. One friend in particular is a porn connoisseur who has an awesome STASH of porn on DVD, in addition to watching it online.
Sometimes we watch it for amusement. Sometimes we watch it to get off. Several of my porn-watching female friends are married and/or are in serious relationships. Sometimes, the guys don't watch porn as much as THEY do!
The point is, women aren't the "long-suffering victims" of porn that as the press seems to want you to believe. And if men enjoy it, and women enjoy it.....
....what was the problem again?
31
To play devil's advocate here--the problem with porn is that more and more women are becoming porn widows. Men prefer jerking off to porn to having sex with their wives, like Dan's last column.
32
I actually thought it was a well written article. Without necessarily agreeing with his conclusions, I think that he at least represents someone on the right with whom I could have an intelligent debate. I appreciate his perspective and the fact that he appears to be thinking through the issue rather than simply reflexively accusing or shouting about "sin."
33
I definitely agree with you, Andrew! I actually cut and pasted my comment above into an email to Mr. Douthat, because he seems like the kind of person who WOULD give me a thoughtful response. I asked him where my comment fits into his argument. We'll see if he replies! :)
34
31, the problem is not with porn. Its with the men who'd rather jerk off to porn than having sex with their wives.
36
32, Calling porn adultery is calling it sin, and it is accusing those who view porn of being adulterous sinners.
37
31, the problem is not with porn. Its with the men who'd rather jerk off to porn than having sex with their wives.
That is a relationship problem, not a male problem.
That is a relationship problem, not a male problem.
38
@35 Wikipedia can help you understand the difference between botanical versus culinary vegetables and fruits, and then you could rewrite your rant more coherently.
39
What about the idea that a picture is not merely a picture but also the idea of what it represents and some complicity in it's making? We prosecute people for the act of viewing some kinds of porn. In other words we put people in jail for what is essentially just the ideas in their head. I'm not advocating for those ideas but let's deal with the reality that that is something we do. So a picture is not just a picture.
Ever watch a show called "Cold Case Files"? They broadcast photos of actual murder victims with the faces blurred out. So there's some real woman dead after being tortured and raped. But that's okay to show on TV. Why is that okay? And shouldn't that be more troubling to us than porn?
Ever watch a show called "Cold Case Files"? They broadcast photos of actual murder victims with the faces blurred out. So there's some real woman dead after being tortured and raped. But that's okay to show on TV. Why is that okay? And shouldn't that be more troubling to us than porn?
40
Douthat says that porn and masturbation are interdependent -- one wouldn't happen without the other.
Really? I haven't actually climaxed without porn? What was that stuff leftove in my hand??
Really? I haven't actually climaxed without porn? What was that stuff leftove in my hand??
41
#29.. while that may be true generally for hets i don't think the 'problem' is significant for homos because men tend to think of porn a lot differently then women since the large bulk of porn is made for and consumed by men. gay men don't have fidelity issues with porn because we generally share the same points of view. there's really nothing to hide there. gay men tend to encounter difficulties in the matters of taste. but even then it won't be a deal breaker. porn is fantasy , make believe. those people are actors ( and actresses ).
not that i'm like, all dan savage about this. but my gay friends, those of us in relationships, are more apt to either enjoy porn together or be fairly 'meh' about it. me and my manfriend have completely different tastes in porn so we don't view it together. but we don't hide it either and i don't care when he watches it or what he's watching.
not that i'm like, all dan savage about this. but my gay friends, those of us in relationships, are more apt to either enjoy porn together or be fairly 'meh' about it. me and my manfriend have completely different tastes in porn so we don't view it together. but we don't hide it either and i don't care when he watches it or what he's watching.
42
Ah, but it's not so simple as that, #39. The intent of the laws against child pornography are not to police thoughts - which is impossible - but to depress the production of child pornography by criminalizing the demand for it, based on the belief that consumption creates demand for greater supply.
43
"A 2004 study found that married individuals who cheated on their spouses were three times as likely to have used Internet pornography as married people who hadn’t committed adultery."
I'd like to see something establish causation not simply correlation. I'd bet that the higher porn consumption is much more likely to be linked to being cut off sexually.
I'd like to see something establish causation not simply correlation. I'd bet that the higher porn consumption is much more likely to be linked to being cut off sexually.
44
"porn is a form of adultery and that [Dan Savage is] not helping."
Somehow I Dou(b)that. Dan Savage is TOTALLY helping! Thank goodness too.
Does this columnist distinguish between "porn" and "erotica"? Is "erotica" a form of adultery as well? I think Mr. Doubt Hat has dug hisself a particularly deep hole on this one.
I wish him luck in the upcoming battles.
(Actually, no I don't. No luck to him!)
Somehow I Dou(b)that. Dan Savage is TOTALLY helping! Thank goodness too.
Does this columnist distinguish between "porn" and "erotica"? Is "erotica" a form of adultery as well? I think Mr. Doubt Hat has dug hisself a particularly deep hole on this one.
I wish him luck in the upcoming battles.
(Actually, no I don't. No luck to him!)
46
Did anyone else read that long rambling crapola from Ross Douthat and wish that instead they'd taken the time to down-load some porn? Because I did.
47
@42
That's the point: That the act of viewing of certain images makes you a participant in their creation. But then porn = adultery right? A picture is not just a picture.
The horrific pictures I have seen on TV promote the commission of serial murder by that argument. As you can see our society is much more cozy with violence than with sex.
That's the point: That the act of viewing of certain images makes you a participant in their creation. But then porn = adultery right? A picture is not just a picture.
The horrific pictures I have seen on TV promote the commission of serial murder by that argument. As you can see our society is much more cozy with violence than with sex.
49
I got bored and didn't finish the article. Did he cover the fact that conservative states view more liberal ones? 'Cuz I found that fascinating.
50
@45, I was just wondering how long it will take for that to become his new name, or at least Slog name. Don't worry Dan, Ross Douche-Hat is no match for you!
51
@ 45
I TOTALLY read that as Douche-Hat the first time through. Then, I read his article. Now, I am pretty certain there was a reason I made the freudian slip to begin with.
I TOTALLY read that as Douche-Hat the first time through. Then, I read his article. Now, I am pretty certain there was a reason I made the freudian slip to begin with.
52
@47: But supply and demand is not adultery. Cold Case Files, child porn, all of that is a smokescreen. Watching porn != having sex with another person, even by remote.
53
I just don't get the distinction that is made between "nude pictures" and "hard-core." If it's a just a naked chick, is it OK? Adding another person makes it hardcore? I'm confused.
I need to know because I want to know if Douthat considers me a porn star because I work as an art model. Cause if I am, that's kinda flattering.
I need to know because I want to know if Douthat considers me a porn star because I work as an art model. Cause if I am, that's kinda flattering.
54
Perhaps the porn divide - folks who are mostly okay with it, folks who aren't - is a generational one, much like one of the huge divides about gay marriage opinion is. I'm almost 40, & many of my friends & younger don't find porn threatening. There is the occasional porn widow: don't put up with it. It should be an enhancement, not a replacement.
I definitely think guys expect more in terms of diversity of sex acts because of porn, but I also think we have to give them some credit. Most guys I've talked to about their porn use know that the guy or girl they are checking out online is a fantasy only. Magazines like Us & Glamour & Cosmo do way more damage to women's self-image than porn, & most couples I know who have porn, both parties know about it.
Nude modeling is definitely different than hardcore porn. Hardcore - showing the bits spread open, sex in motion - is more explicit. Sorry, @ 53, you're NOT a porn star. Except maybe w/ your honey.
I definitely think guys expect more in terms of diversity of sex acts because of porn, but I also think we have to give them some credit. Most guys I've talked to about their porn use know that the guy or girl they are checking out online is a fantasy only. Magazines like Us & Glamour & Cosmo do way more damage to women's self-image than porn, & most couples I know who have porn, both parties know about it.
Nude modeling is definitely different than hardcore porn. Hardcore - showing the bits spread open, sex in motion - is more explicit. Sorry, @ 53, you're NOT a porn star. Except maybe w/ your honey.
56
@52
Yes, _I_ agree that porn is not adultery. But the article is another example of others (you included, no?) categorizing the viewing of a photo as taking part in the subject of the photo. If you want to dispute the article you can't simply say that it's silly. Why is it silly? What is the premise of the argument the author makes? I'm saying that his premise is that a picture is not just a picture. The viewer is a participant and therefore an adulterer.
My statement about illegal photos was not just about kids. There are other subjects which you are forbidden to look at. I have to leave my state to engage in BDSM. But it doesn't end there. Images of BDSM (among other things) are illegal where I live. I am a fierce civil libertarian so I am deeply concerned that we have laws punishing people for the ideas in their heads, even if I despise those ideas.
If there is a smokescreen argument being used it's that photos with kids in them cause more kids to be abused. (Really? Viewing photos is why they do it? Stopping the pictures will stop the crime?) If that's true then as I said you must also say that about every other subject. So what's the point of making rape porn illegal but allowing the broadcast of pictures of rape victims after they are dead. And not only that but identifying the person by name and describing the details of what was done to them. How do "CSI" and "Law and Order" not create a market for all sorts of horrors?
I believe that a picture is just a picture. How I interpret it and what I do while viewing it is a matter of personal privacy. That seems obvious to me but unless we explicitly decide that as a society we will continue to have people saying things like porn = adultery.
Yes, _I_ agree that porn is not adultery. But the article is another example of others (you included, no?) categorizing the viewing of a photo as taking part in the subject of the photo. If you want to dispute the article you can't simply say that it's silly. Why is it silly? What is the premise of the argument the author makes? I'm saying that his premise is that a picture is not just a picture. The viewer is a participant and therefore an adulterer.
My statement about illegal photos was not just about kids. There are other subjects which you are forbidden to look at. I have to leave my state to engage in BDSM. But it doesn't end there. Images of BDSM (among other things) are illegal where I live. I am a fierce civil libertarian so I am deeply concerned that we have laws punishing people for the ideas in their heads, even if I despise those ideas.
If there is a smokescreen argument being used it's that photos with kids in them cause more kids to be abused. (Really? Viewing photos is why they do it? Stopping the pictures will stop the crime?) If that's true then as I said you must also say that about every other subject. So what's the point of making rape porn illegal but allowing the broadcast of pictures of rape victims after they are dead. And not only that but identifying the person by name and describing the details of what was done to them. How do "CSI" and "Law and Order" not create a market for all sorts of horrors?
I believe that a picture is just a picture. How I interpret it and what I do while viewing it is a matter of personal privacy. That seems obvious to me but unless we explicitly decide that as a society we will continue to have people saying things like porn = adultery.
57
The difference is that children are actually molested to make child porn. No one is actually killed in the process of making CSI or Law & Order. And the producers of "real life" crime shows aren't murdering the subjects to make their programs.
58
I thought the right gave up on this one back in the 90's. But I guess we'll always see little spurts of it, pun completely intended.
59
@57
That's true but this thread isn't about the producers of the material it's about the viewers. The author's point is that viewing porn is an act of adultery. We are all in deep trouble if we accept that premise.
That's true but this thread isn't about the producers of the material it's about the viewers. The author's point is that viewing porn is an act of adultery. We are all in deep trouble if we accept that premise.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Hating People Doesn't Make Them Thinner by Jen Graves
-
Los Angeles Gay Bar Bans Bachelorette Parties Until Marriage Equality Is Attained by David Schmader
-
Fill in the Blank by Grant Brissey
-
This Reminds Me of the Great Calculator Scare of the Late '70s/Early '80s by David Schmader
-
Idiot Tries to Defend Bigoted Anti-Gay-Marriage Preacher on Anderson Cooper by Paul Constant
-
SL Letter of the Day: Putting It In by Dan Savage
-
Six Moms with Too Much Time on Their Hands and a Shitty Website Decide to Fight Gay Superheroes by Paul Constant
-
Why Mayor McGinn's Wife Canceled Her Family's Seattle Times Subscription by Eli Sanders
-
What the Hell Is Wrong With Seattle's Pride Parade? by Dominic Holden
-
Meet the UW "Swagga Suit" by David Schmader
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (59) RSS